In
a recent post, I noted how the Worcester Diocese, through its official newspaper The "Catholic" Free Press, has long promoted dissent from Church teaching and just recently published an editorial challenging the Church's teaching, which is expressed so powerfully in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that Christ instituted a hierarchical Church. It should come as no surprise, then, that Bishop Robert McManus, who is the Publisher of this dissenting newspaper, should have permitted Dr. Thomas Groome to appear as a speaker within his diocese. I have already detailed in previous posts why this is so disturbing. And I have shown how the Worcester Diocese, through the "Commission for Women," agitates for women's ordination and radical feminist theology as well as New Age spirituality, which is occultic. See
here and
here.
In an article entitled "Beware of Thomas Groome or Anything Associated with Him, Stacey Johnson, a homeschooling mother of four, writing for New Oxford Review, explains: "In these decades of crisis in the Catholic Church in
America, we must be on guard to threats to our children's faith.
However, those threats are not always easily recognized, and the average
Catholic frequently overlooks what is possibly the most dangerous one:
your parish CCD program.
Many recognize that there has been a
crisis of catechesis for the past thirty years or so. According to the
oft-cited Gallup Poll, the majority of American Catholics either cannot
identify Catholic teaching on the Eucharist or do not believe it.
Catholics cohabit, contracept, sterilize, abort, divorce, and support
same-sex "marriages" at about the same rate as the population at large,
indicating a large-scale rejection or ignorance of the Church's moral
teachings. And as many commentators have aptly pointed out, the
Catechism of the Catholic Church received a cool reception among the catechetical elite of the U.S.
Numerous publishers of Catholic religious education materials, however, now claim to be developing programs in response to the
Catechism.
These materials usually have a statement in the front indicating that
the program has been found by a committee of the United States
Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) to be in conformity with the
Catechism.
Concerned parents looking over the programs will often be hard-pressed
to find blatant doctrinal errors, though there is often a lopsided
emphasis on social justice and environmental concerns, and the truths of
the Faith aren't always presented in the most convincing fashion.
So far, this doesn't sound so bad. Not the strongest presentation of
the Faith perhaps, but nothing to get excited about, right? Wrong. One
of the most significant problems with many of the CCD programs is the
way in which the teachings are presented. They actually appear to be
designed to reduce the chances that our children will accept the
teachings of the Church.
Arguably the single most influential
person in Catholic religious education circles in the U.S. today is
Thomas H. Groome. He is a laicized priest and professor of theology and
religious education at Boston College, and a prominent theorist and
writer in the field of religious education. His writings have appeared
in the USCCB's catechetical journal, The Living Light, and he
is a frequent speaker and honoree at religious education conferences.
The National Catholic Educational Association offers workshops for
catechetical leaders developed from a text of which Groome is one of two
editors. Groome is a consultant for William H. Sadlier Inc., a major
publisher of catechetical materials used in every diocese in the U.S. He
is the primary author of two of Sadlier's K-8 programs for Catholic
children: Coming to Faith and God With Us. His books include Educating for Life: A Spiritual Vision for Every Teacher and Parent, and Sharing Faith: A Comprehensive Approach to Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry.
The latter provides a detailed explanation of his methodology for
religious education, which he calls "shared Christian praxis."
According to Groome, shared Christian praxis has five steps, called
movements, which comprise the method. None of the movements can be
eliminated; each is considered essential to the educational approach.
The movements are as follows: (1) Naming / Expressing "Present Praxis":
Participants communicate either their own or society's current behavior
or beliefs. (2) Critical Reflection on Present Action: Participants are
called to look critically at what motivates their present behaviors and
beliefs, including any prejudices or societal influences. (3) Making
Accessible Christian Story / Vision. (4) Dialectical Hermeneutic to
Appropriate Christian Story / Vision to Participants' Stories and
Visions: Participants compare their critically understood present praxis
from Movement Two with the "Christian Story" that was presented in
Movement Three, and develop a new understanding of "their truth." (5)
Decision / Response for Lived Christian Faith: Participants have an
opportunity to decide how they intend to live their faith as a result of
the decisions that they made about it in Movement Four. Each of these
movements requires a fuller explanation in order for us to see their
true import.
Movement One is the simplest of the five. It
requires only that the participants in the session have an opportunity
to communicate (or at least reflect upon) their own or a larger
society's (for example, the Church's) current practice of belief as it
relates to the topic at hand. The main issue would be that it is their
own expression of it, rather than someone else's, that they communicate.
Movement Two then has the participants critically reflect upon
why they act or think as they do. The students are to examine anything
that might affect their current practice or belief, whether it is
prejudices, ideologies, societal influences, consequences, or past
experiences. As Groome writes in
Sharing Faith, "As a
constitutive activity of shared Christian praxis, critical reflection
encourages 'disbelief' as well as belief, 'disbelief' especially toward
the controlling myths . . . that maintain structures of domination —
sexism, racism . . . and so on." Participants are encouraged to see how
their history affects their current behavior and beliefs as well as
their interpretation of them and to see how they should change. One
example Groome gives of how to apply Movement Two is the assignment of a
paper to male undergraduate students who are resistant to "feminist
consciousness."
In Movement Three, things really get
interesting. Here is where the "Christian Story" is presented. According
to Groome, the "Christian Story" is "the whole faith life and practical
wisdom of the Christian community." It is important to note, however,
that according to shared Christian praxis, the "Christian Story" must be
"made accessible" in a particular way. The educator is responsible for
discerning both what part of the "Christian Story" to make accessible
and how to do it. The "Story" is to be adapted and interpreted to the
participants, using hermeneutics (methods of interpretation) or
retrieval, suspicion, and creative commitment.
Groome explains that
religious educators should have a "healthy suspicion" of their faith
tradition and that it is the educator's responsibility to uncover the
true meaning of the original texts, a meaning that probably has been
lost due to "distortions" in the "accepted interpretations" of Christian
tradition. Movement Three is totally incompatible with an understanding
of any sort of traditional moral or theological absolutes. And Groome
himself agrees. To provide any sort of absolute truth is the furthest
thing from his mind. From Groome's perspective, to absolutize either an
expression or interpretation of a faith tradition is to deaden it.
Rather, as he makes clear in
Educating for Life, it is necessary to constantly reinterpret both Scripture and Tradition "in light of what we bring to it from the present."
For Groome, one of the building blocks for wisdom is feminist theology,
so when the educator is determining how to present the "Christian
Story," he would do well to consider such things as the insights of "the
great Scripture scholar, Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza," who is a
radical feminist theologian who believes that Jesus (whom she refers to
as "the woman-identified man" in her book
In Memory of Her) intended to liberate women from "patriarchal structures" but, as Groome summarizes for us in
Sharing Faith, this "central characteristic of the Jesus movement was 'written out' of the New Testament and must now be reconstructed."
One way this translates into religious education is that the emphasis
is always on the "equality and mutuality" of men and women, rather than
their complementarity. Add to this the repeated assertion that
discrimination in all its forms must be fought against wherever it is
found. Consequently, when the Sacrament of Holy Orders is presented
without any explanation as to why only men may be ordained, it is
practically a given that most students will dissent. In fact, it would
be surprising if any did not.
Movement Four is even worse. Its
purpose is to have the participants place their own "stories" in
dialectic with the "Christian Story" presented in Movement Three. This
means that besides examining their current beliefs and practices in
light of the "Christian Story," the students are to
bring present praxis to interpret Christian Story / Vision . . . there
are aspects of it they affirm and cherish and aspects of present
understanding and living of Christian faith that are called into
question and refused if necessary (the Story has had distortions), and . . . participants can construct a more appropriate understanding of the Story. (Ibid.)
Groome says that some people prefer to accept that something is true
based upon the authority of the Church, but they are "arrested" at a
lower stage in their faith journey. The point is that if children are
exposed to shared Christian praxis long enough, they will believe that
any aspect of the Faith is up for grabs.
The only thing
apparently absolutely necessary for salvation is a commitment to modern
social-justice issues, though that does not seem to include opposition
to abortion. In fact, although both the books mentioned in this article
have lengthy sections devoted to social-justice issues, abortion is
rarely mentioned. What Groome sees as important is a commitment to "The
Reign of God," which, although he occasionally acknowledges as having an
eschatological component, is largely to be realized in time by making
everyone feel accepted and by making sure that every aspect of
everyone's lives is valued (unless, of course, one of those aspects is
one of the "deadly social sins" of absolutism, sexism, specieism, etc.).
Not surprisingly, Groome himself does not believe in a
hierarchical Church or an ordained priesthood, and dissents from Church
teaching on issues related to human sexuality, the papacy, and biblical
inerrancy. He demands "inclusive" language and believes that all
language we have regarding God is a human construct, rather than being
divinely revealed. Groome draws heavily from the "scholarship" of
numerous feminist theologians, as well as well-known dissenter Richard
McBrien, and neo-Modernist Scripture scholar Raymond Brown. Quoting
Kenan Osborne in a footnote to a discussion of the priesthood in
Sharing Faith,
Groome notes, "In spite of the long tradition of this view [that the
Apostles were commissioned at the Last Supper to preside at the
Eucharist], contemporary scholars find no basis for this interpretation.
In other words, Jesus did not ordain the apostles (disciples) at this
final supper to be 'priests.'" Rather, Groome believes that the ability
to celebrate the Eucharist comes from the power of the Holy Spirit
working through the assembly. He also has, understandably, a rather
faulty understanding of the Mass and the Eucharist.
Finally, in
Movement Five, the students make some commitment to action based upon
the determinations made in the previous movements. An example that
Groome gives from personal experience is informative. He was asked to
speak with a group of women on "Women in the Church." When he began the
session it was apparent that the women accepted the Church's teaching on
male-only ordination, something that Groome believes is an injustice
against women. As he puts it, "It seems that the exclusion of women from
ordained ministry is the result of a patriarchal mind-set and culture
and is not of Christian faith. The injustice of excluding women from the
priesthood debilitates the church's sacramentality in the world; it is a
countersign to God's reign"
(Sharing Faith). By the end of
their time together, the women had all "come to see" that the Church was
a patriarchal, oppressive social structure. As part of their Movement
Five activity, the women resolved to each write to a young woman in
order to encourage her to fight for "full inclusion" in the Church.
This is the methodology that also underpins the
Coming to Faith
series from William H. Sadlier Inc. As a methodology for religious
instruction, however, it clearly undermines the Faith. In this series,
shared Christian praxis is used not only to "educate" the children, but
to "educate" the catechists as well. For example, catechists are asked
to come up with their own definition of conscience, to develop and work
to implement their personal vision of a "hospitable Church," to
determine what they think helps their parish to grow (choices including
"spirited" liturgies, an attractive building, involvement in peace and
justice issues, and a congenial pastor, but not including a commitment
to orthodoxy or devotion to the Eucharist), to assess the "kind of
relationship" they have with the sun, moon, wind, and rain, or their
"relationship" with grass, trees, house plants, and soil. Additionally,
the uniqueness of Christ's Presence in the Eucharist is downplayed. For
example, the second-grade teacher's manual,
Coming to Jesus,
says, "Jesus, already present in the community and in the word of God,
now becomes present in another dimension." God is not referred to as
"Father" unless absolutely necessary. In fact, one of the objectives of
the lesson on the "Our Father" for first-graders is "to help the
children believe that God cares for us as a loving
parent" (italics added).
There is a trend in the
Coming to Faith
series toward syncretism with Native American spirituality, including
the use of non-Christian Native American prayers. In one instance in the
sixth-grade teacher's manual, the catechist is instructed to have the
children form a circle around a globe with each child saying a line of
the prayer, the teacher having pointed out that "through the Eucharist,
we are one with all the people in this earth." The prayer goes like
this:
Every part of this earth is sacred . . .
Every clearing and humming insect is holy . . .
All belong to the same family.
Teach your children that the earth is our mother . . .
The wind gave our children the spirit of life.
This we know, the earth does not belong to us; we belong to the earth . . .
(Coming to God's Word, William H. Sadlier Inc.)
Actually, our Catholic Faith teaches that the
Church and
Mary are to be regarded as our Mother, not the earth; that
God gave us the "spirit of life," not the wind; and that people and insects do
not belong to the same family!
The kindergarten teacher's manual,
Coming to God's World,
informs the catechist that, "By its emphasis on kinship with the
elements and the environment, Native-American spirituality can
complement our own faith tradition." Consequently, one of the "Justice
and Peace" resources that follow every lesson encourages the catechist
to suggest that the children "[pamper] or cater to Mother Earth."
Perhaps this also explains why sixth-graders are instructed in their
activity book to center their prayer on a rock.
The catechists
and children are also exposed to the teachings of some whose works have
been condemned by the Church, including Teilhard de Chardin and Anthony
de Mello. Moreover, liturgical abuses are canonized in a number of ways.
One example: In the first-grade teacher's manual, a litany for use in
class is proposed that invokes the intercession of non-canonized and
even non-Catholic personages, including Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King
Jr., and Cesar Chavez.
Groome's approach to Scripture is clearly seen in the sixth-grade book of Sadlier's
Coming to Faith series,
Coming to God's Word.
This grade level focuses on Scripture and presents it in such a fashion
that the average child would have no understanding of what the Church
actually teaches about the Bible upon completion of the course. Not even
the Gospels are given as examples of history, so the student is likely
to be left with the impression that perhaps nothing in the Bible
actually happened.
Groome proposes that his methodology allows people to come to their own
decisions about "their truth." He believes that it is important to just
make the "Story" accessible, but that defending it or asserting its
truth is to deny the work of the Holy Spirit in the person to whom it is
presented. Ironically, the way in which the "Story" is presented, as
well as the entire methodology of shared Christian praxis, is designed
to manipulate a person into seeing it in a particular way. Rather than
being presented as Truth, Christianity is presented as one frequently
distorted option among many roads leading to God. The only absolutes are
that orthodoxy is wrong (due to being sexist, absolutist, patriarchal,
etc.) and that social justice, in the style of liberation and feminist
theology and "creation spirituality," is what saves you.
So,
what's a person to do upon finding this methodology present in his
parish CCD program? Obviously, it's important to do what you can to have
it replaced by a solid, faithful program such as the
Faith and Life or
Image of God
series from Ignatius Press. But that's easier said than done. In order
to present an effective case, you'll need to do a little homework and a
lot of praying. I would highly recommend reading Eamonn Keane's
A Generation Betrayed
from Hatherleigh Press for a more thorough presentation of this topic
than possible in a magazine article.
You might also want to read Donna
Steichen's Ungodly Rage, available from Ignatius Press, for
an orthodox presentation of feminist theology, since it is one of the
underpinnings of Groome's theology. Share what you have learned with
other concerned parents in your parish. Then talk to your priest. He may
not be aware of the problems with the program, since they are often
very subtle. You might even convince him to read Keane's book. If that
doesn't work, you can appeal to your bishop. Unfortunately, Groome seems
to be well-respected in catechetical and episcopal circles, and these
books have been rubberstamped by a committee at the USCCB. It may come
down to withdrawing your children from the parish program and teaching
them yourself, using one of the above-mentioned resources, while you
continue to fight for the rights of the rest of the children to receive a
truly Catholic education. It is also important to remember that parents
have the primary right and responsibility to educate their children
(Catechism,
#1653, 2221-2225). It is time for us to insist that our rights in these
matters be respected and that our children be educated in the Truth
s of the faith."
Stacey Johnson is correct in suggesting that faithful Catholics should "Beware of Thomas Groome
and anything associated with him." And this would certainly include the Worcester Diocese.
In a recent post, I noted how the Worcester Diocese, through its official newspaper The "Catholic" Free Press, has long promoted dissent from Church teaching and just recently published an editorial challenging the Church's teaching, which is expressed so powerfully in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that Christ instituted a hierarchical Church. It should come as no surprise, then, that Bishop Robert McManus, who is the Publisher of this dissenting newspaper, should have permitted Dr. Thomas Groome to appear as a speaker within his diocese. I have already detailed in previous posts why this is so disturbing. And I have shown how the Worcester Diocese, through the "Commission for Women," agitates for women's ordination and radical feminist theology as well as New Age spirituality, which is occultic. See here and here.